Gang member gets death sentence in L.A. teen athlete's murder
Gang member Pedro Espinoza sits in court as he is sentenced to death for the 2008 murder of Jamiel Shaw II, a star Los Angeles High School athlete, in a Los Angeles courtroom Friday, Nov. 2, 2012. / AP Photo/Nick Ut
LOS ANGELESA gang member who killed a promising Los Angeles High School football player because he believed the athlete's red Spider-Man backpack linked him to an opposing gang was sentenced to death on Friday.
Pedro Espinoza had told authorities he was willing to kill for his gang, even if it meant going to death row.
Superior Court Judge Ronald H. Rose imposed that very sentence — ordering Espinoza taken to San Quentin State Prison. The judge rejected defense arguments that the 23-year-old didn't get a fair trial.
"The evidence is clear he decided to murder the victim in cold blood and bragged about the killing after," Rose said. "The defendant executed the victim as he lay on the ground defenseless."
An undated file photo of Los Angeles High School student Jamiel Shaw Jr., 17.
/ AP Photo/Shaw FamilyJamiel Shaw II was a 17-year-old standout running back when he was gunned down in 2008. He was not a gang member.
His parents and friends appeared in court Friday wearing red. They said it wasn't to symbolize a gang — but for "the blood spilled."
"You don't have a right to execute someone and then come in and plead not to be executed," said Jamiel Shaw Sr., the father of the victim.
Shaw said he devoted his life to preparing his son for a brilliant athletic career.
"We really thought we had a chance," he said. "My son was groomed to succeed."
Anita Shaw, a U.S. Army sergeant, told of being in Iraq on her second tour of duty when she was summoned by her commander and told that her son had been murdered.
"I lost it," she said. She invoked scripture, saying she knew she was supposed to forgive — but "I'm not that strong of a person."
Espinoza didn't move and didn't look at Shaw's parents as they spoke.
The judge noted that Espinoza had been released from jail shortly before the killing on an unrelated charge and had been counseled by an officer who warned him of the consequences of further criminal behavior.
Rose urged the family to focus on raising their 13-year-old son, Thomas, who also attended the sentencing. Shaw said outside court he would do that but feels the gang situation has changed parenting.
"You're not raising them anymore," he said. "You're trying to keep them alive."
Popular on CBSNews.com
- Oklahoma tornado victim search efforts winding down
- Children rescued from two elementary schools in Oklahoma 19 Photos
- Deadliest U.S. tornadoes 10 Photos
- Tornado's destructive path 17 Photos
- Up-close video of Moore, Okla., tornado Play Video
- Oklahoma tornado recovery grinds on amid grim scenes 179 Comments
- Oklahoma tornado as seen by storm chasers Play Video
- Twisters touch down in the Midwest 13 Photos
Says it all. If you are willing to kill for your tribe/cause/creed/faith or whatever; you are no longer entitled to have ANY say in the disposition of your life. Tribal loyality is always subordinate to common decency.
On the other hand I will throw out this thought: Killing Sr. Espinoza will make him a martyr among his fellow scum and elevate his status to that of cult hero. A better thing to do (IMHO) would be - while keeping a watchful eye on the Constitution - to force Pedro, through whatever means available and necessary, to recant his crime and publically repudiate his gang; his friends within it and every single last founding value and ethic that guides his life and that of the gang. He now must be put in the position of risking his life (and likely losing it) in tireless and public opposition of those values that led him to death row in the first place.
This would send a strong message to Pedro E's fellow travelers that there ARE certain beliefs, points of view and ways of supporting that which is important; and the resultant behaviors that are flatly and unequvocably unacceptable and unless major changes in attitude and philosophy take place the same things (or worse) could happen to them.
Once again, so there's no misunderstanding.....Believe what you want; support what you wish but if you go to the extreme of killing for your beliefs or causes; you are no longer entitled to them.
He did not merely kill, he murdered; and not merely murdered, but done so senselessly.
His act was in essence terrorism.
Well put.
Those who are so extreme in their loyalty to their narratives are, in effect, terrorists.
Let's also look at how we extoll the virtues of violence, especially with guns. How many movies did the Governor of California make that promote violence? We honor it, pay money to see it, and then complain when kids emulate it.
Two wrongs don't make a right but slaughtering the head gang bangers (read: domestic terrorists) with our special ops military might dissuade wannabes. And who cares what kind of upbringing Espinoza had? No remorse for others and asking for compassion is B.S.
Lots of people brought up under bad circumstances step above that. This dog is beyond rehabilitation and putting him down is the right decision. Why waste the public's money on appeals or putting him on life without parole?
He should walk up the gallows before he leaves the courthouse.
My interest is in trying to prevent future murders of kids like Jamiel.